Teachers face new evaluation process

Eileen FitzGerald

Published 9:02 pm, Saturday, March 9, 2013

April 15 is more than a deadline to file taxes for educators across the state. It begins the path to a whole new world.

The state Department of Education wants school districts to file new plans by that date on how they will evaluate teachers and administrators, in a way that is a "game changer," Danbury Deputy Superintendent William Glass said.

"Historically, it was good enough for a teacher to deliver instruction and hope all the kids would get it," Glass said. "The American system was that `if I did a good job teaching, my kids will learn.' "

The new model requires nearly half the weight of an evaluation of a teacher's effectiveness to be based on the academic growth of their students.

More Information

Teacher evaluationsTeacher Performance and Practice, 40 percent, requires observing teachers in a series of areas like classroom strategies and behaviors, planning and preparing lessons, reflecting on personal teaching skills, professionalism.Parent Feedback, 10 percent, based on a survey of parents.Student Growth and Development, 45 percent, state tests and other measures, including student learning objectives, the specific skill or knowledge objectives teacher sets out for each class and each student's related measurable outcome.Whole-School Student Learning Indicator, 5 percent, determined by state-set student learning indicators and/or feedback from students surveyed.Performance scoresExemplary - Substantially exceeding indicators of performanceProficient - Meeting indicators of performanceDeveloping - Meeting some indicators of performance but not othersBelow Standard - Not meeting indicators of performance

All districts will evaluate teachers on four components, starting in a limited way next year and with a full rollout in 2014-15.

Educators are finalizing plans, often hybrids of the state model piloted by 10 districts this year, and are incorporating some of their own practices.

They recognize the need for the change, but admit it is difficult and time consuming and argue the new mandates will stretch thin administrators who conduct the evaluations. Some want more flexibility or a more streamlined approach.

Districts can choose among models for scoring an observation of a teacher, one component, worth 40 percent of the score.

There are some choices among the other components, including parent feedback, worth 10 percent; student feedback, worth 5 percent; and even the thorniest element -- student performance, such as test scores -- which is worth 45 percent.

For instance, Stamford Public Schools must expand its scoring method from satisfactory and unsatisfactory to four score levels. It also must expand its use of student performance to satisfy the state's new system.

While the district considers student test scores during teacher evaluations, they're not a formal rubric yet, said Fay Ruotolo, the district's interim executive director of human resources.

"It never hurts to refocus," she said. "Sometimes we can get complacent and don't look at our practice as deeply as we could." That is true of even veterans, she said.

Still, she understands those who don't want the evaluation to become penalizing.

"So the process doesn't dictate a rigid result if the goal that was set is not met," Ruotolo said. "That it doesn't mean a career is over. It means that we have to think of how to support improvement and growth."

Max Waxenberg, executive director of the Connecticut Teachers Association, which has 41,000 teacher members, thinks the mandate is too much of a one-size-fits-all in a state that has towns like affluent Darien and urban, poor Bridgeport just 20 miles apart.

"This is important and we have to do it right. We will need to recognize the good parts and the bad parts (of the plan) and let the good parts bubble up for the local districts," Waxenberg said. "I'm hopeful. In my dialogues with the commissioner (Stefan Pryor), we've talked about flexibility and we hope that flexibility can prosper."

Challenge or `disaster?'

The state has learned a lot from the pilot programs the past year, state Department of Education chief talent officer, Sarah Barzee, said Friday.

"We expected challenges in the implementation," she said, and progress has been appropriate given complexities of the process.

"Across the board, we have heard support from folks about the concept of increasing the consistency of the teacher evaluation practice across the school district," Barzee said.

Pilot districts already have reported an increase in the rigor of classroom work and praise from teachers for feedback they need to improve, she said, based on the teachers' evaluations.

"If a teacher is performing and knocking the ball out of the park, I don't need to be spending a lot of time observing that teacher's instruction unless I want to learn something. We need to concentrate efforts on teachers that need the most help," Vallas said.

"Built into this foundation is a way for teachers to identify areas to improve. Up until now we've been held accountable for what we do, but not the results," he said. "This is a paradigm shift and it will take some time getting adjusted too."

But with the phase-in and the state's promised $12 million to pay for training staff for the evaluations, he said educators should manage the changes.

Not a `gotcha'

Bethel plans to apply for approval of a hybrid plan that includes observations, a teacher's professional learning plan and personal action plan to improve. The district also has a new pilot program with some teachers coaching other teachers.

"We are using student learning data and using it very aggressively," and the district puts supportive pressure on teachers to grow more, but the district does not want to rank teacher on student test scores, Jordan said.

She understands the state's push to improve teaching in the schools that are failing.

Her district still improves, despite the more needy student population, because of the teachers' work.

"It's not magic," she said. "It's not luck."

Brookfield, New Milford, and New Fairfield officials are working with Education Connection, the regional service agency, on parts of their plans.

Josh Smith, New Milford's assistant superintendent, said just the time administrators will need to conduct the number of evaluations the state requires -- at least three a year for both new and exemplary teachers -- is worrisome.

Now, New Milford has three tiers for teachers with at least four years of experience. One third are formally evaluated each year, one third are peer reviewed, and one third do a self evaluation.

"We figure each evaluation takes 120 minutes," he said. Teachers have a 30-minute meeting before and after the observation, with the administrator evaluating them, and there is a 30-minute observation.

"It's going to get a little messy," Smith said about finalizing a plan. "But you can't get too anxious. We agree where we want to go. We shouldn't get caught in the weeds. We have to trust this document is trying to do the best for students, teachers, parents and the community. It's not a `gotcha' philosophy," Smith said.

"If it breaks down to the test scores hurting individual teachers, we'll lose trust and credibility."

Greenwich schools have an overhauled evaluation process that they will work to retain even as they modify it to satisfy the state mandates.

For instance, teachers set professional growth models based on their student outcomes, but it wasn't a percentage of the evaluation score, according to Deputy Superintendent Ellen Flanagan.

She knows the state evaluation plan is worthwhile, but worries it doesn't recognize years of work some districts have done.

"We have made major gains with our teachers," Flanagan said. "We're going to make our best effort to keep what's worked in our plan."

How to find the measures of student progress in subject areas and grade levels that are not part of the state testing cycles, worries educators, including Brookfield Assistant Superintendent Genie Slone, though she doesn't doubt the need for change.

"Connecticut ranks 50 out of 50 states in the achievement gap," she said. "We need to do something different so students are successful. As a state, we need to be move forward on this."

Danbury teachers are on board with the changes, said Danbury's teachers union president Cindy Mirochine.

Danbury's evaluation was revised in 2001. It required teachers to incorporate student performance in their personal goals, but what is different in the new state mandates is the weight the performance will play.

"We have tried to tell our teachers that a lot of things that we need to do are already in place. It's going to be a learning process," she said. "But, I think there is a positive feel out there about it."

The new evaluation process can give teachers more control over their professional learning, based on input from students, parents and test scores, said New Fairfield Assistant Superintendent Barbara Mechler.

"I hope with all the time and money we are putting into it," she said, "it will have a positive impact on teaching and learning."